A Comparison of Indirect Versus Experimental Strategies for the Assessment of Pica

University of the Pacific, Stockton, CA, USA.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders (Impact Factor: 3.06). 07/2009; 39(11):1582-6. DOI: 10.1007/s10803-009-0766-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We conducted functional analyses of pica for three individuals with varying levels of intellectual disabilities. In addition, two indirect assessment instruments (the Motivational Assessment Scale [MAS], and the Questions About Behavioral Function [QABF]) were also administered to both the parent and teacher of the child participants. Results of the functional analyses indicated that pica was sensitive to automatic reinforcement. Further, results of both the MAS and QABF also suggested behavioral sensitivity to automatic reinforcement.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Challenging behaviors (CB) in the form of self-injurious behaviors, aggression, property destruction, tantrums, pica, and other disruptive activities are common among persons with intellectual disabilities. Lack of social and communication skills, temperament issues, and other symptoms that characterize these persons contribute to the high rates of CB. In recent years, applied behavior analysis (ABA) has proven to be a particularly effective treatment for these issues. Functional assessment is a foundational strategy for such intervention. The methods most commonly used to achieve this goal include interviews and observations, experimental functional analysis, in vivo assessment, and standardized tests. The purpose of this group of techniques is to establish the variables that maintain the behavior, and treatment then flows from these data. This paper reviews the current state of the art in the area of functional assessment.
    06/2014; 1(2). DOI:10.1007/s40474-013-0006-y
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Challenging behavior is one of the largest barriers to ensuring that people with intellectual disabilities (ID) are able to participate in the community. These difficulties have become one of the main causes of social exclusion. The research into and treatment of challenging behavior has usually involved the identification of its function and the manipulation of the events or environmental conditions that influence its occurrence (antecedent variables). The present research explores the relationship between antecedents and behavioral function and the extent to which antecedent variables may act as predictors of behavioral function. This relationship is explored using two standardized instruments: Questions About Behavioral Function and Contextual Assessment Inventory. Data from the validation of these instruments for the Spanish population involved 300 participants with ID and 328 challenging behaviors. The results suggest that social/cultural variables are most related to challenging behavior, whereas biological variables seem to only be related to physically maintained behavior.
    Research in developmental disabilities 10/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.ridd.2013.09.040 · 4.41 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Severe problem behavior (e.g., self-injury and aggression) remains among the most serious challenges for the habilitation of persons with intellectual disabilities and is a significant obstacle to community integration. The current standard of behavior analytic treatment for problem behavior in this population consists of a functional assessment and treatment model. Within that model, the first step is to assess the behavior–environment relations that give rise to and maintain problem behavior, a functional behavioral assessment. Conventional methods of assessing behavioral function include indirect, descriptive, and experimental assessments of problem behavior. Clinical investigators have produced a rich literature demonstrating the relative effectiveness for each method, but in clinical practice, each can produce ambiguous or difficult-to-interpret outcomes that may impede treatment development. This paper outlines potential sources of variability in assessment outcomes and then reviews the evidence on strategies for avoiding ambiguous outcomes and/or clarifying initially ambiguous results. The end result for each assessment method is a set of best practice guidelines, given the available evidence, for conducting the initial assessment. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Behavioral Interventions 11/2014; 30(1). DOI:10.1002/bin.1400 · 0.80 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 19, 2014